http://www.aviationpros.com/news/106...nway-work-done
Another runway needs to be built? Hmmmm.
Discuss
Printable View
http://www.aviationpros.com/news/106...nway-work-done
Another runway needs to be built? Hmmmm.
Discuss
We definitely need another runway which is closer to HoBe
Didn't JFK (or Idelwild) previously have additional runways, or perhaps different runways than now? I know that up until recently, there was a 14-32 that was very short. But I see some evidence of possible larger runways (2, maybe 4) when checking the satellite view on Google.
That would be sweet. And make it strickly for departures ONLY. This way there isn't another runway to try and cover when watching arrivals :tongue:Quote:
Originally Posted by Zee71
That was a STOL runway back in the day. Currently it is taxiway echo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedbagel_001
I don't see another runway being built at Kennedy any time soon. There is simply no real estate to expand. PANYNJ cannot expand into Jamaica Bay due to a variety of laws and contract agreements.
Two questions to answer about adding another runway at JFK:Quote:
Originally Posted by Zee71
1 - Where do you put it? Remember, Jamaica Bay is a federally protected wildlife refuge, so you can't fill it in.
2 - Who is going to pay for it?
Answer those two, and the rest is easy...
Easy answer!
Less RJ's, MORE 747-8i's
that's probably the best solution to date....Quote:
Originally Posted by JHNA57
the first thing to come to mind when i heard about this was:
"PANYNJ. when it absolutely, positively has to be ^&#*%$ up overnight."
It's not the runway's fault, it's the airspace and ATC.
JFK tries to do the same amount as traffic as LAX with just two runways. 3 if the split the config but another runway is never going to happen.
Well....i think they need to unprotect some of the wildlife refuge or start buying off property next to runway 31L-31R. All that stuff that is on Rockaway Blvd.. As far as paying, put a surcharge to travelers. Just like the airlines making billions of dollars off baggage fees, why not the same for an additional runway. I remember when leaving Cancun there was always some hidden surcharge. Anyway that's my dream!PHP Code:Two questions to answer about adding another runway at JFK:
1 - Where do you put it? Remember, Jamaica Bay is a federally protected wildlife refuge, so you can't fill it in.
2 - Who is going to pay for it?
I believe in the 50's the plans showed 7 runways, which then got revised to 5 runways.
More runways help in the same way that car traffic is improved with more roads....it doesn't. Airspace and aircraft capacity are how you ease on congestion.
The article doesn't say what the reasons were for those delays, which could be for nearly anything, possibly none of which are the fault of ATC or airport design.
I'm not familiar with taxiway details at JFK; is this the area just north of 22L and 22R? When did it cease to be a STOL runway?Quote:
Originally Posted by AirtrafficController
I will go against all that's been said. JFK property is certainly not efficienly laid out... there is A LOT OF empty space at JFK that can be better used. There is SO MUCH space in fact to the north of RWY 31R/13L that it is enough for a parallel. Take down the triple hangars (I know, I would cry but life goes on,, they sit unused), tear down the DHL, Emirates and Varig/Continental Cargo buildings and the US Post Office and Customs and they can easily fit another parallel there. All those buildings can be relocated elsewhere ON PROPERTY. Plenty of dead/empty space around Taxi Compound/Verizon, Next to UPS where the Air France Cargo area is, also dead space... all the tanks west of Police Headquarters, what the heck do they do? There are huge expanses of empty lots or empty buildings all around the property... they can be repurposed. So, question then is money of course. If that is resolved, the space is already on premises.
But, what would another runway gain you? Actually, JFK already has plenty. We are probably only thinking of the actives... if you take that into consideration, pilots are trained to land in crosswinds, and JFK does that regularly as many other single runway airports around the world... use em all! 31L is already used while the 4/22 is in use and so is 22 and 13's so that's not a problem.
If you only concentrate on more capacity on existing infrastructure, you have to worry about ATC and regulations. Aside from physics, what is the minimum separation feasible between landings? It is all about safety/physics correct? The regulations are there to ensure the physics are not violated. Correct? Even if my dream 31RR/13LL were to be a reality, will it be far enough for parallel landings? Is capacity really an issue? I think the runways are functioning just fine so the CONDITION of them should not be the issue should it?
This is very interesting indeed :smile:
It's the taxiway that goes northwest of the American terminal towards American Hangars/Evergreen, Southern, UPS, etc. Cargo areas...Quote:
Originally Posted by RDU-JFK
Also, the entire access roadway system can be ripped apart and use an satellite dropoff area and then use the train system to shuttle people to the terminals like it is done in many places. The Nassau Expwy and the JFK entrance road also take up valuable real estate.
Statisticly, I am going to have to disagree with the premis that it is airport configuration. It is the airlines. Between 0700 and 0930 JFK is a mad house. Again from 1800 to 2200 it gets the same way. Everyone wants to go at the same time, it is driven by market demand. In the last few years JFK has made tremendous improvements in their air traffic and delay management. Your not going to get additional runways but people are going to complain. Short of bulldozing LGA or EWR, the problem will remain status quo. You couldnt improve JFK operations by many stretched beyond what is being undertaken at the moment. Than, you have the factor of summer weather. Due to PHL and EWR's locations, RBV becomes the proverbial sacred goat. Even with the new JFK Wrap we will see come summer.
I don't doubt that with some juggling of buildings and roads, they could find room for a new runway without disturbing the wildlife.
But even if by some miracle a design and financing were found, NIMBYs would never let it happen.
I must say, a 747 on final makes a LOT of high pitched whining noise that is hard to swallow 24x7... I bet JFK neighbors love 4L/R arrivals and 31L departures
I have to agree with Hiss Srq.......when I use to work at JFK while attending college the prime hours of operations around the late 70's and early 80's was from 1500 - 2200. I definitely it's an operations issue and not a runway issues.
Here are a few MITO (Minimum Interval Take Off) videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNxmorJtq_8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJ7niLYSVFo
Hello everyone,
Im new to the site, but, have been visiting for sometime, I have read that they are planning to extend R/W 4L-22R and reconstruct it the same way as 13R-31L
You are correct. I believe the runway became no more in the 1990s.Quote:
Originally Posted by RDU-JFK
Correect, I remember watching DH7's and an occasional J31 land on it in the early mid 90's or so I beleive it was. Used to be really cool to see a turboprop coming in on that one and slightly staggered behind it would be a BA 742 or something to that like for the big boy runway.
The runway wasn't rebuilt with the purpose of improving delays...it was built because the old one's life span was up....
and I think it was 150' wide and they needed it to be 200' wide to meet some new standard?Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
That is correct in order to safely accommodate the Airbus A380 and Boeing 747-8 Intercontinental/Freighter.Quote:
Originally Posted by gonzalu